Can global warming create more snow? I believe it can. Really, in a nutshell, global warming = more energy in the system. That's it. Personally I believe the planet is getting warmer. Note I said "Believe", not know.
Here's my issue. This issue has been politicized by people on both sides, although primarily the left from where I sit. It has been turned into a religion by people like Al Gore. There has been a lot of talk by idiot politicos who have made statements that no snow in 2005 was proof of AGW. Then this year the record snow is proof of AGW. Both statements are complete shit; a single season of extreme weather means fuck-all. There is proof of the MWP. There is not proof of the MWP being a global phenomenon, however, there is also no proof that it isn't. If AGW actually exists, then why the fucking with the data? Why the need to include non-reviewed and non-substantiated data in government reports? If the science is sound it should stand on it's own without augmentation.
You know who really pisses me off? Al "the debate is over" Gore. Al "we use 10 times the energy as the average family but buy carbon credits" Gore. Al "Fly around the planet in a privet jet but you need to drive a Prius at all time" Gore. Well, really? Fuck you Al. The science is not settled and you're a fucking hypocrite. AGW is a theory, just as relativity is a theory; there is a lot of evidence to support it, but it's still not complete. And I don't want to get started on the ponzi scheme that is carbon credits. Either producing excess CO2 is bad or it's not; buying someone else's allotment (that they probably weren't gong to use any way) is a crock. The excess energy you are using is still making more CO2 than necessary. Please explain why George Fucking Bush lives in a seriously eco-friendly house and you live in an energy wasting mansion with all the shit that comes out of your mouth?
When "scientists" and politicians say the science is settled about something as complex as global weather systems my bullshit meter pegs at eleven. The climate models need a lot more work. The accuracy of collected data is in some cases questionable. This doesn't mean that all the data is bad, but the theory cannot be presented as settled and complete at this point.
My over all point is that the politicians need to shut the hell up, because then know about as much about climate change as they do about finance: not very fucking much.
I used to think that way as well. There are a lot of people that go overboard and publish every detail of their life, which I think it stupid. Personally I have very little personal info on FB, and my birth date and city of residence are not correct (I mean, really, publishing your full name, birth date and the city where you live isn't exactly a good idea IMO, not that the info isn't out there, but still.)
I have over the last few months connected with some friends and relatives I haven't spoken to in years, for one reason or another, and I frequently use it to plan things with a group of friends.
I've actually found it to be a useful tool for maintain a real social life. You don't have to be an attention whore to use facebook.
eBooks should cost far, far less than print books, not merely because their marginal cost of production is tiny, but because they deliver far less value than a print book
Not at all true. almost everything that has to be done to produce a print book needs to be done to produce an e-book.
Editing, typesetting, formatting, proofing, marketing, artwork, etc all still needs to be done. Only the distribution is different. In one case you're printing a book (an automated manufacturing process) or you're publishing a book to an e-marketplace (a bunch of servers, software and bandwidth (not free)). The reality is that the great majority of the cost in producing a book is labor, and it's all still required, regardless of print or electronic distribution, so while printed materials may cost more to produce, the cost difference is not the huge amount that people seem to think it is.
Agreed. I do have an SLR, and when I want to take good photos I use that, but I usually use the camera in my cell phone. The difference, however, is that the images from my SLR with a good lens are many orders of magnitude better in all ways (other than composition) that shots from my cell phone. I find the experience of reading on a Kindle only marginally better than reading on my iPhone.
That's called aging. It's normal, unfortunately. Many people discover they need glasses once they reach a certain age. For me it was 30. It didn't go bad over night, it got bad over a long period of time and I unconsciously compensated for it until I realized one day I couldn't read a street sign. My conversations with my eye doctor, personal experience, and much searching of the internet have led me to the conclusion that using a computer monitor can not damage your vision permanently, but can cause temporary effects like tired eyes, headaches, and reduced night vision. So can watching a bunch of TV or a number of other activities. I do notice after a day in front of the computer that my night vision is reduced, but If I don't use the system on Sunday, for instance, I have no problem Sunday evening.
I've used the Kindle, Nook and played with a Sony one. I'm getting an iPad. I read stuff on my iPhone all the time and it doesn't bother me any more than reading paper for the same length of time.
eInk IS good for reading a book. It's not good for much of anything else as far as I can see. Maybe one day when they figure out full color eInk that's fast enough to do video, but until then I'll go with LCD or OLED when it's affordable.
I have enough shit to carry, I flatly refuse to pay $260 (actually, more like $500 for the big screen) for a uni-tasker device. The iPad that I plan to get is the $599 one. Let's see, $489 for a kindle DX to read books, or $600 for an iPad to read books, browse the web, watch videos, do e-mail, give a presentation, play Super Monkey Ball, etc. Even allowing for a bit of eye-strain, which again, doesn't seem to be an issue with me, there is no contest here. I am disappointed that it doesn't have multitasking or a camera, but compared to the competition, there is NO comparison.
How, exactly is that a troll post. I think a lot of you people need a big fucking dose of reality. Actually, the Slashdot crowd modding that a troll post makes my augment for me. I apparently forgot one of the ruels of Slashdot, which I have deduced to be, "thou shalt not point out any deficiencies in OSS, especially Linux, lest thou wish to be modded troll.
The problem is that unless you know what you're doing, Linux can be a pain in the ass, and your response is typical, and indicative of why Linux will never be mainstream as it currently sits. I constantly see responses that are intimidating to the novice user. On of my favorites is, "read the man page". Like that's really going to help someone who doesn't know what they are doing. The fact is that Windows almost always just works, and installing drivers and software almost always works and you don't usually have to know what you're doing to make it work. On Linux (which I use on a daily basis, BTW) installing drivers and software generally works but you frequently have to know what you're doing, and / or do a fair amount of googling to get things working properly.
DogDude may not know what he is doing. That's no excuse for the OS to be difficult to install and configure properly. As long as the level of required technical knowledge remains significantly higher for Linux than Windows or Mac OS, it will never become mainstream. It's kind of like most people not knowing how to work on their car. You shouldn't need to know how to install a fuel pump to drive a car; knowing how to put in gas, check the oil, and the air pressure should be a sufficient level of knowledge.
This required physical access to the device. If you have unlimited physical access to any device, digital or analog, you will eventually be able to crack it, assuming you have the available resources. The key is to keep the bad guys from getting access in the first place, which isn't always possible. Even the best security has numerous weak points, like the security guards that only make $40K a year, or people that leave their devices unattended in public places.
Probably best to store all critical information on punch cards and secure them in a burn safe guarded by people that are already multi-millionaires.
But what's the point of having 700-800 miles on a long trip? Dear god, if you drive 700-800 miles without stopping to rest or eat, please don't do it when I'm on the road!
A lot of people drive long distances. I'd have no problem with a 200 mile range except for the fact that every 200 miles I'd need to stop for 4 hours to recharge, turning that 6 hour 400 mile trip into a 10 hour trip.
At the rate we're going with debt, it's probably more like never. But don't worry, at least we'll have solved global warming and global hunger by then.
Because Microsoft keeps a bunch of backward compatible crap in the kernel and the OS, and Apple doesn't. AFAIK you can still run 16-bit apps on Windows 7. Honestly this is one of the reasons I like the Mac. All the deadwood is trimmed on a regular basis. Look at Snow Leopard, they completely deleted support for PPC and guess what? it's significantly faster on the supported machines.
To me this is a lot of complaining about nothing. I have a iMac G3 400 Mhz that I use as an iTunes server running Leopard. It's not fast, but it works just fine for browsing, etc.
Note that plenty of OTHER PEOPLE have made a big deal about it, but surely you don't claim that Obama should have denied their free speech, do you?
Of course not. There are very limited reasons where the government can curtail the speech of citizens and that certainly wouldn't qualify
There seems to be a lot of assumption that Obama wants to clamp down on people / companies using these images to prevent using them to make it appear that Obama has endorsed something. Firstly, that does not really fall under copyright laws, that would fall under fraud. Secondly, some time spent searching the net yields no clear cases of this having happened, except for the one mentioned in the summary. For those of you that suggest this is the reason, please provide sources. I do not believe that this is a rampant problem.
Also, as someone else has stated the Whitehouse has three conflicting messages on the use of photos
Nothing has to be done. In the past, most presidents have simply ignored things like this. Obama has a very thin skin, and this is more evidence. The president should be above such things, and for example should not be responding to talk show personalities either directly or through any staffers. Obama apparently has not been in politics to learn how to deal with criticism properly.
You're assuming A: there is a problem and B: that the same percentage of women want these types of positions as compared to men. Women have the capability to be whatever they want, especially in the US. I've worked for some large tech companies and there were lots of women in senior management. It is insulting and condescending to assume that women need help. 90%+ of registered nurses and medical assistants are female. I wonder if there is some reason that men are being over looked for those positions? I think we need a taxpayer funded study to see why this is.
You're probably right, but this is what the Flash Guy says:
"But let’s talk more about the Flash Player on the Mac. If it is not 100% on par with the Windows player people assume that it is all our fault. The facts show that this is simply not the case. Let’s take for example the question of hardware acceleration for H.264 video that we released with Flash Player 10.1. Here you can see some published results for how much the situation has improved on Windows. Unfortunately we could not add this acceleration to the Mac player because Apple does not provide a public API to make this happen. You can easily verify that by asking Apple. I’m happy to say that we still made some improvements for the Mac player when it comes to video playback, but we simply could not implement the hardware acceleration. This is but one example of stumbling blocks we face when it comes to Apple."
http://theflashblog.com/?p=1641
Personally I think Flash is a resource hog and a piece of crap, and it needs to die soon.
What about tachyon emissions? Can you imagine what might happen if time such beams from different times were to converge on a single point in space? All life on Earth could be destroyed before it even exists!
Slashdot Mirror
Posting "currently out of the country for two months" and sitting in the living room with a shotgun could be fun.
Can global warming create more snow? I believe it can. Really, in a nutshell, global warming = more energy in the system. That's it. Personally I believe the planet is getting warmer. Note I said "Believe", not know.
Here's my issue. This issue has been politicized by people on both sides, although primarily the left from where I sit. It has been turned into a religion by people like Al Gore. There has been a lot of talk by idiot politicos who have made statements that no snow in 2005 was proof of AGW. Then this year the record snow is proof of AGW. Both statements are complete shit; a single season of extreme weather means fuck-all. There is proof of the MWP. There is not proof of the MWP being a global phenomenon, however, there is also no proof that it isn't. If AGW actually exists, then why the fucking with the data? Why the need to include non-reviewed and non-substantiated data in government reports? If the science is sound it should stand on it's own without augmentation.
You know who really pisses me off? Al "the debate is over" Gore. Al "we use 10 times the energy as the average family but buy carbon credits" Gore. Al "Fly around the planet in a privet jet but you need to drive a Prius at all time" Gore. Well, really? Fuck you Al. The science is not settled and you're a fucking hypocrite. AGW is a theory, just as relativity is a theory; there is a lot of evidence to support it, but it's still not complete. And I don't want to get started on the ponzi scheme that is carbon credits. Either producing excess CO2 is bad or it's not; buying someone else's allotment (that they probably weren't gong to use any way) is a crock. The excess energy you are using is still making more CO2 than necessary. Please explain why George Fucking Bush lives in a seriously eco-friendly house and you live in an energy wasting mansion with all the shit that comes out of your mouth?
When "scientists" and politicians say the science is settled about something as complex as global weather systems my bullshit meter pegs at eleven. The climate models need a lot more work. The accuracy of collected data is in some cases questionable. This doesn't mean that all the data is bad, but the theory cannot be presented as settled and complete at this point.
My over all point is that the politicians need to shut the hell up, because then know about as much about climate change as they do about finance: not very fucking much.
Churchill had it right...
I used to think that way as well. There are a lot of people that go overboard and publish every detail of their life, which I think it stupid. Personally I have very little personal info on FB, and my birth date and city of residence are not correct (I mean, really, publishing your full name, birth date and the city where you live isn't exactly a good idea IMO, not that the info isn't out there, but still.)
I have over the last few months connected with some friends and relatives I haven't spoken to in years, for one reason or another, and I frequently use it to plan things with a group of friends.
I've actually found it to be a useful tool for maintain a real social life. You don't have to be an attention whore to use facebook.
eBooks should cost far, far less than print books, not merely because their marginal cost of production is tiny, but because they deliver far less value than a print book
Not at all true. almost everything that has to be done to produce a print book needs to be done to produce an e-book.
Editing, typesetting, formatting, proofing, marketing, artwork, etc all still needs to be done. Only the distribution is different. In one case you're printing a book (an automated manufacturing process) or you're publishing a book to an e-marketplace (a bunch of servers, software and bandwidth (not free)). The reality is that the great majority of the cost in producing a book is labor, and it's all still required, regardless of print or electronic distribution, so while printed materials may cost more to produce, the cost difference is not the huge amount that people seem to think it is.
Agreed. I do have an SLR, and when I want to take good photos I use that, but I usually use the camera in my cell phone. The difference, however, is that the images from my SLR with a good lens are many orders of magnitude better in all ways (other than composition) that shots from my cell phone. I find the experience of reading on a Kindle only marginally better than reading on my iPhone.
That's called aging. It's normal, unfortunately. Many people discover they need glasses once they reach a certain age. For me it was 30. It didn't go bad over night, it got bad over a long period of time and I unconsciously compensated for it until I realized one day I couldn't read a street sign. My conversations with my eye doctor, personal experience, and much searching of the internet have led me to the conclusion that using a computer monitor can not damage your vision permanently, but can cause temporary effects like tired eyes, headaches, and reduced night vision. So can watching a bunch of TV or a number of other activities. I do notice after a day in front of the computer that my night vision is reduced, but If I don't use the system on Sunday, for instance, I have no problem Sunday evening.
I've used the Kindle, Nook and played with a Sony one. I'm getting an iPad. I read stuff on my iPhone all the time and it doesn't bother me any more than reading paper for the same length of time.
eInk IS good for reading a book. It's not good for much of anything else as far as I can see. Maybe one day when they figure out full color eInk that's fast enough to do video, but until then I'll go with LCD or OLED when it's affordable.
I have enough shit to carry, I flatly refuse to pay $260 (actually, more like $500 for the big screen) for a uni-tasker device. The iPad that I plan to get is the $599 one. Let's see, $489 for a kindle DX to read books, or $600 for an iPad to read books, browse the web, watch videos, do e-mail, give a presentation, play Super Monkey Ball, etc. Even allowing for a bit of eye-strain, which again, doesn't seem to be an issue with me, there is no contest here. I am disappointed that it doesn't have multitasking or a camera, but compared to the competition, there is NO comparison.
perhaps you've noticed that a huge chunk of the previous stimulus package went into just that
No, I haven't noticed that unless by "huge chunk" you mean 3%. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aJAoR5GECKWo
If you want to see his head explode try to explain for each.
All I know is the Internet is that little blue roundish e thing on my desktop.
How, exactly is that a troll post. I think a lot of you people need a big fucking dose of reality. Actually, the Slashdot crowd modding that a troll post makes my augment for me. I apparently forgot one of the ruels of Slashdot, which I have deduced to be, "thou shalt not point out any deficiencies in OSS, especially Linux, lest thou wish to be modded troll.
The problem is that unless you know what you're doing, Linux can be a pain in the ass, and your response is typical, and indicative of why Linux will never be mainstream as it currently sits. I constantly see responses that are intimidating to the novice user. On of my favorites is, "read the man page". Like that's really going to help someone who doesn't know what they are doing. The fact is that Windows almost always just works, and installing drivers and software almost always works and you don't usually have to know what you're doing to make it work. On Linux (which I use on a daily basis, BTW) installing drivers and software generally works but you frequently have to know what you're doing, and / or do a fair amount of googling to get things working properly.
DogDude may not know what he is doing. That's no excuse for the OS to be difficult to install and configure properly. As long as the level of required technical knowledge remains significantly higher for Linux than Windows or Mac OS, it will never become mainstream. It's kind of like most people not knowing how to work on their car. You shouldn't need to know how to install a fuel pump to drive a car; knowing how to put in gas, check the oil, and the air pressure should be a sufficient level of knowledge.
Not sure why this is modded funny. Seems pretty accurate and real-world to me.
This required physical access to the device. If you have unlimited physical access to any device, digital or analog, you will eventually be able to crack it, assuming you have the available resources. The key is to keep the bad guys from getting access in the first place, which isn't always possible. Even the best security has numerous weak points, like the security guards that only make $40K a year, or people that leave their devices unattended in public places.
Probably best to store all critical information on punch cards and secure them in a burn safe guarded by people that are already multi-millionaires.
But what's the point of having 700-800 miles on a long trip? Dear god, if you drive 700-800 miles without stopping to rest or eat, please don't do it when I'm on the road!
A lot of people drive long distances. I'd have no problem with a 200 mile range except for the fact that every 200 miles I'd need to stop for 4 hours to recharge, turning that 6 hour 400 mile trip into a 10 hour trip.
At the rate we're going with debt, it's probably more like never. But don't worry, at least we'll have solved global warming and global hunger by then.
Because Microsoft keeps a bunch of backward compatible crap in the kernel and the OS, and Apple doesn't. AFAIK you can still run 16-bit apps on Windows 7. Honestly this is one of the reasons I like the Mac. All the deadwood is trimmed on a regular basis. Look at Snow Leopard, they completely deleted support for PPC and guess what? it's significantly faster on the supported machines.
To me this is a lot of complaining about nothing. I have a iMac G3 400 Mhz that I use as an iTunes server running Leopard. It's not fast, but it works just fine for browsing, etc.
Note that plenty of OTHER PEOPLE have made a big deal about it, but surely you don't claim that Obama should have denied their free speech, do you?
Of course not. There are very limited reasons where the government can curtail the speech of citizens and that certainly wouldn't qualify
There seems to be a lot of assumption that Obama wants to clamp down on people / companies using these images to prevent using them to make it appear that Obama has endorsed something. Firstly, that does not really fall under copyright laws, that would fall under fraud. Secondly, some time spent searching the net yields no clear cases of this having happened, except for the one mentioned in the summary. For those of you that suggest this is the reason, please provide sources. I do not believe that this is a rampant problem.
Also, as someone else has stated the Whitehouse has three conflicting messages on the use of photos
Numbers 1 and 2 would seem to be in conflict with number 3, which I believe is the proper way.
Do you think this would have prevented Chia Obama https://www.chiaobama.com/flare/next or Obama Fingers http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,612684,00.html?
Nothing has to be done. In the past, most presidents have simply ignored things like this. Obama has a very thin skin, and this is more evidence. The president should be above such things, and for example should not be responding to talk show personalities either directly or through any staffers. Obama apparently has not been in politics to learn how to deal with criticism properly.
What about the seal of the Office of the President Elect?
You're assuming A: there is a problem and B: that the same percentage of women want these types of positions as compared to men. Women have the capability to be whatever they want, especially in the US. I've worked for some large tech companies and there were lots of women in senior management. It is insulting and condescending to assume that women need help. 90%+ of registered nurses and medical assistants are female. I wonder if there is some reason that men are being over looked for those positions? I think we need a taxpayer funded study to see why this is.
You're probably right, but this is what the Flash Guy says:
"But let’s talk more about the Flash Player on the Mac. If it is not 100% on par with the Windows player people assume that it is all our fault. The facts show that this is simply not the case. Let’s take for example the question of hardware acceleration for H.264 video that we released with Flash Player 10.1. Here you can see some published results for how much the situation has improved on Windows. Unfortunately we could not add this acceleration to the Mac player because Apple does not provide a public API to make this happen. You can easily verify that by asking Apple. I’m happy to say that we still made some improvements for the Mac player when it comes to video playback, but we simply could not implement the hardware acceleration. This is but one example of stumbling blocks we face when it comes to Apple."
http://theflashblog.com/?p=1641
Personally I think Flash is a resource hog and a piece of crap, and it needs to die soon.
What about tachyon emissions? Can you imagine what might happen if time such beams from different times were to converge on a single point in space? All life on Earth could be destroyed before it even exists!
+6 informative